III.
This is a convenient period to consider the services rendered by various members of the Staunton family as collectors of Poll Tax and Subsidies. There are some 14 documents referring to these matters, ranging in date from 1376 to 1678. The first of these relates to the appointment of Thomas de Staunton and others to collect the Poll Tax for the County of Nottingham in 1376. The total sum thus obtained was £437 13s. 4d., arising from 26,230 persons, not including the inhabitants of the towns of Nottingham and Newark. The next document refers to a later Thomas Staunton in the seventh year of Henry VIII., who was collector of 6d. in the £ for the Soke of Newark. The amount paid in to the Treasury was £70, after the deduction of £1 15s., the fee given to Thomas Staunton. In 1537 Anthony Staunton and five others collected one whole 15th and a 10th granted by Parliament to King Henry VIII., levied on the laity of the County of Nottingham, and payable at the Feast of All Souls. The amount obtained was £567 15s. 01/2d.; and the allowance to the five collectors was £10 6s. 81/2d., which is nearly 41/2d. in the £. Twenty years later Anthony Staunton collected a subsidy, granted to Philip and Mary, from the laity of the Wapentakes of Newark, Thurgarton, and Leigh. This amounted to £328 3s. 0d., his fees being £8 4s. 0d. at 6d. in the £. He paid into the Treasury a surplus of 2d. more which he gives the King.
Robert Staunton in 1563 collected the second payment of a subsidy, from the same Wapentake, amounting to £71. In the same year Gabriel Barwick, his father-in-law, and John St. Andrew collected the second whole 15th and 10th of two whole 15ths and 10th granted to Queen Elizabeth. The sum total of this transaction was £558 6s. 0d., and their allowance was £8 13s. 4d.
Robert Staunton, William Sutton, and John Russell collected one whole 15th and 10th in 1566. They should have obtained £549 8s. 8d., but the receipt is for only half that sum. At the same time they appeared to have paid into the Treasury £55 8s. 11/4d. for a portion of a moiety of £6,000 levied for a 15th and a 10th in the whole kingdom. In 1571 Robert Staunton, before Robert Markham, gave a bond in £1,000 on his appointment as collector in the County of Nottingham of two 15ths and 10ths, and was given his Quietus for the first of these subsidies; the receipt for the second is missing. His son, William Staunton, ten years later succeeded to an estate embarrassed by the private debts of his father amounting as shown by an inventory of the goods of Robert Staunton to over £360. In addition, the deceased seems to have been at the time of his death accountable to the Treasury for a sum of £263 4s. 41/2d. as Collector. William appears to have been treated with great consideration, as he was allowed to pay £100 down, and is given £4 3s. 4d., the expenses for the whole. He paid off the balance by degrees, the last payment being on 30 April, 1586, five years later. He is then given a receipt for the whole sum. Coming to the time of Charles I., we find the following document addressed "To our very loving friend, Mr. William Staunton, Esq., at Staunton, Nottinghamshire, haste there":—
"After our hearty commendations as well for yor discretion as sufficiency of estate, We the King's Mats Comissioners amongst others appointed within the County of Nottingham for the assessing and taxing of the two entire Subsidies granted (to his Maties use) at this present Parliament holden at Westm., have thought good to make choyce of you to bee his Mats Collector within the hundreds of Newark and Bassettlawe in the said county for the collecting and gathering of the said twoe Subsidies. These are therefore in his Mats name to will and require you that you bee and personally appeare before us at the house of Mr. John Reynolds in East Retford in the said County upon Tuesday the 26th of this October by Nyue of the Clocke in the forenooue then and there not onely to receive the Booke and Extract allotted for ye collection, but alsoe to become bounden to the King's Matie for the true collecting and payment of the same into the hands of the Treasurers especially appointed in and by the Act of this present Parliament to receive and issue the same at the tyme limited by the said Act of Parliament. And hereof see that you do not faile as you tender the furtherance of His Ma'ties service herein, and will avoyd the penalty mentioned in the said Act for yor refusall. And soe we bid you heartily farewell and rest yor very loveing friends
Antho. Eyre.
Gervase Eyre.
Thos. Williamson.East Retford, 14 October, 1641."
This was the year before Charles I. raised his Standard at Nottingham. The various levies made upon Staunton and the adjoining parishes will be considered when discussing that period.
The last of these Subsidy papers consist of three documents relating to an Act of Parliament passed in the first year of William III. and Mary, for providing thirty ships of war. For this purpose an assessment of 12d. in the £was made, and Francis Pierrepoint, Edward Bigland, Sergeant-at-Law, William Graves, Samuel Staples, William Drury, John Dand, John Parker, Henry Humfree, Esquires, were appointed Commissioners for the Town and County of Nottingham. How this document, with many other Dand papers, such as the Mansfield Court rolls, came into the possession of the Stauntons is not clear, but possibly John Dand was related to George Cam of Tuxford, whose heiress married Harvey Staunton. The second paper is as follows:—
A Duplicate for the Towne of Staunton in the Hundred of Newarke for ye last 5 moneths Assessmt of the 17 granted to the King towards the building 30 Shipps of Warre aced to an act of Parliament made Ao Dni 1676.
|
3 months. |
|
2 months. |
||||
|
£ |
s. |
d. |
£ |
s. |
d. |
|
Harvey Staunton |
00 |
06 |
05 |
00 |
04 |
02 |
|
Mr. Cartwrights Tennts |
00 |
14 |
06 |
00 |
09 |
08 |
|
Bp Margetsons Tennts |
00 |
10 |
09 |
00 |
07 |
02 |
|
The Parson of Staunton for his tenthe and for his glebe |
00 |
09 |
05 |
00 |
00 |
03 |
|
John Hall |
00 |
04 |
09 |
00 |
03 |
02 |
|
John Tuttbury |
00 |
04 |
09 |
00 |
03 |
02 |
|
Widdow Martin |
00 |
04 |
09 |
00 |
08 |
02 |
|
Johan Sallmon |
00 |
00 |
11 |
00 |
00 |
07½ |
|
Widdow Green |
00 |
03 |
05¼ |
00 |
02 |
03½ |
|
Robt Scrimshire |
00 |
01 |
04½ |
00 |
00 |
11 |
|
ffrancis Smith |
00 |
01 |
08¾ |
00 |
01 |
02 |
|
William Rose |
00 |
00 |
03 |
00 |
00 |
02 |
|
Michael Mosse |
00 |
00 |
03 |
00 |
00 |
02 |
|
Thomas Kirke |
00 |
00 |
06 |
00 |
00 |
04 |
|
Widdow Rose |
00 |
00 |
03 |
00 |
00 |
02 |
|
William Draper |
00 |
00 |
02¼ |
00 |
00 |
01½ |
|
Ricd Malkinson |
00 |
00 |
02¼ |
00 |
00 |
0½ |
|
William Green. |
00 |
00 |
01½ |
00 |
00 |
01 |
|
Widdow Berridge |
00 |
00 |
00¾ |
00 |
00 |
00½ |
|
Henry Towers |
00 |
00 |
00¾ |
00 |
00 |
00¼ |
|
|
03 |
04 |
06 |
02 |
13 |
00 |
|
The additions are incorrect in second column. On the Back are three seals:—
- A Ship, Ao Douglass.
- Three Fleurs-de-lys 2 and 1, Will Welby.
- A Ship, Edward Warde.
Attached to this account is the precept of John Hall and Francis Salmon collectors for the parish of Staunton. A receipt given by Matthew Jenison, Receiver-General for the County of Nottingham for a portion of the Subsidy completes these documents.
It is interesting at this date when a conflict between the two Houses of Parliament seems imminent, to note that the voting of these supplies for building thirty Ships of War gave rise—as Professor Richard Lodge points out—to a controversy between the Upper and Lower House. The Lords, when it came before them, amended the Bill, and required that accounts should be rendered to them. The Commons having rejected the amendments, a conference was held, and finally the Lords, in consideration of the danger to the country if the Bill did not pass, waived their amendments. At the same time, in an address to the Crown, they asserted that only out of great loyalty they had "laid aside for this time so great a righte."
St. Lawrence Choir, Staunton church.